There is insufficient data on pediatric endoscopic sedation practices worldwide. This study aimed to assess nationwide data on the current pediatric endoscopic sedation practices in Taiwan.
Members of the Taiwan Society of Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition in 2010 were asked to participate in an 18-item questionnaire survey regarding current sedation practices for diagnostic esophagogastric-duodenoscopy (EGD).
A total of 22 of 32 questionnaires were returned for a response rate of 68.8%. A majority (86.4%) of the respondents practiced in a medical center hospital setting, and 72.7% preferred sedation during EGD. The proportions of respondents applying sedative methods in cases aged < 1, 1∼12, and > 12 years old were 85.7%, 100%, and 23.7% respectively. Ketamine (27.8%) and midazolam with meperidine (22.2%) were the most commonly applied sedation agents, while the percentage of respondents using regimens that included propofol was 11.2%. Comparing complications between EGD with and without sedation, only hypoxia (Wilcoxon statistics=347.00, p=0.003) was significantly more common in sedated patients. The endoscopists' satisfaction rating was greater among respondents using sedation compared to those without (visual analog scale 9 vs. 7; p=0.0001).
A majority of pediatric EGD in Taiwan was performed under sedation and applied more often to younger children. Endoscopists were more satisfied during EGD when practicing sedation. This survey should help formulate updated practice guidelines and policies regarding endoscopic sedation.
"Availability of specific antagonists for these agents is the attractive point when using these medications. For these reasons, midazolam alone or midazolam/opioid combination is strongly preferred by gastroenterologists [27,28,29,30]. However, benzodiazepine/opioid combination has relatively long time to achieve adequate sedation, procedure, and recovery . "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: It is more difficult to achieve cooperation when conducting endoscopy in pediatric patients than adults. As a result, the sedation for a comfortable procedure is more important in pediatric patients. The sedation, however, often involves risks and side effects, and their prediction and prevention should be sought in advance. Physicians should familiarize themselves to the relevant guidelines in order to make appropriate decisions and actions regarding the preparation of the sedation, patient monitoring during endoscopy, patient recovery, and hospital discharge. Furthermore, they have to understand the characteristics of the pediatric patients and different types of endoscopy. The purpose of this article is to discuss the details of sedation in pediatric endoscopy.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To present evidence and formulate recommendations for sedation in pediatric gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy by non-anesthesiologists.
The databases MEDLINE, Cochrane and EMBASE were searched for the following keywords "endoscopy, GI", "endoscopy, digestive system" AND "sedation", "conscious sedation", "moderate sedation", "deep sedation" and "hypnotics and sedatives" for publications in English restricted to the pediatric age. We searched additional information published between January 2011 and January 2014. Searches for (upper) GI endoscopy sedation in pediatrics and sedation guidelines by non-anesthesiologists for the adult population were performed.
From the available studies three sedation protocols are highlighted. Propofol, which seems to offer the best balance between efficacy and safety is rarely used by non-anesthesiologists mainly because of legal restrictions. Ketamine and a combination of a benzodiazepine and an opioid are more frequently used. Data regarding other sedatives, anesthetics and adjuvant medications used for pediatric GI endoscopy are also presented.
General anesthesia by a multidisciplinary team led by an anesthesiologist is preferred. The creation of sedation teams led by non-anesthesiologists and a careful selection of anesthetic drugs may offer an alternative, but should be in line with national legislation and institutional regulations.
07/2015; 7(9):895-911. DOI:10.4253/wjge.v7.i9.895
Note: This list is based on the publications in our database and might not be exhaustive.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.